Multicore Packet Processing Forum

By Eric Carmes – 6WIND Founder and CEO

In a previous post, I described the different possible solutions for the Fast Path implementation.

The following table summarizes the main characteristics of these different solutions using the solution numbering defined in the diagram of the previous post.

Let’s discuss now the main criteria for selecting the best solution for your project.

First, it is very important to be sure your Fast Path can implement the different solutions, whether you will develop your Fast Path solution yourself or purchase a commercial solution from a software company that specializes in this area of technology. It will guarantee that you have an implementation that meets your requirements.

A key criteria is of course the availability of an executive for the selected processor. If no executive is available, the only solution is the Linux kernel Fast Path approach.

If an executive is available, you should use the executive Fast Path if you want to maximize the packet processing performance or to have guaranteed performance as you use dedicated cores.

The hybrid Fast Path is the best option if only drivers (no library) are available under the executive environment. It can also be selected if you need less than one core for the Fast Path or if you need to share cores between Fast Path and application; a hybrid solution brings more flexibility.

Other criteria could also be important. From a development standpoint, Linux kernel and hybrid Fast Path solutions are easier to debug because you can use standard Linux tools.

Sensitivity to GPL concerns might influence your selection. Both the executive solution and the hybrid solution using a Linux userland implementation are less susceptible to GPL concerns than the Linux kernel-based Fast Path implementations.

More information about 6WINDGate architecture can be found here.

You can download more detailed documents here.

You can check 6WINDGate FAQ here.